Welcome to the Piano World Piano ForumsOver 2 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

PianoStudent88, I understand the concept of counting and can count basic pieces but when the rhythms get complicated and uneven I tend to internalize the timing do to the difficult counting while playing. It tends to make the music hackish.

I just thought it should be added to the template, especially for beginners and intermediate players like myself who still struggle with counting. And to mention metronome setting etc...

A great bonus who be for you or Keystring to do you tube demos of some of the projects.

After playing chords in the families in the order keystring presented, (starting from the all-white key chords, and proceeding to the odd ones), I like to explore them strung together so that the last note of one chord is the first note of the next. (This may be a personal quirk of mine: I like putting things in order.)

Chocolate layer cake (all black: just one of these)GbBbDb

Oreo cookie chords (black on the outside, white in the middle)DbFAbAbCEbEbGBb

An "odd" oneBbDF (black white white)

White key major chords (only the white piano keys are used):FACCEGGBD

Reverse Oreos (white on the outside, black in the middle)DF#AAC#EEG#B

An "odd" oneBD#F# (white black black)

The last note of the last one, F#, is just a different name for the first note of the first one, Gb. So you can keep going in a circle with these.

Or do this in reverse, moving from each chord to the chord before it in the list, which is probably more useful for the order these are likely to show up in pieces. (Cue music for "Circle of Fifths"!)

Of course remember to play the minor chord versions as well, toggling the middle note down a half-step.

I love that it's possible to string the chords together like this without breaking up the white/oreo/reverse-oreo families.

Edit: Changed the files from version 2a to version 2b. That change corrects the beginning of bar 13 from two dotted quarters to a half and a quarter. That plus the missing flat seems to be what was still bugging me..... ;-)

After playing chords in the families in the order keystring presented....

Just to correct an impression, there is no real order to the chords, except as groups. You could start with Oreo cookies, all blacks, all whites, 'oddies" (the B's), anywhere - have fun and play with them.

I understand the concept of counting and can count basic pieces but when the rhythms get complicated and uneven I tend to internalize the timing do to the difficult counting while playing. It tends to make the music hackish.

Depending on how you have learned to practice and approach new pieces, I suspect that there are a number of things that can help you beyond having counts written in.

The first is a concept which is huge if you don't have it yet. That is, while performed pieces are a seamless whole, they are not approached that way. Professionals already have the skills, so they'll have less steps, but they still use this process for new, harder music. 1. You take a piece apart, work on smaller sections, and put it back together. 2. You work on different aspects of the music, and then incorporate them into a whole. Or you do one aspect or layer, then another, then another. Timing is one aspect. Timing itself can be broken down further. It can be done by you, especially once you understand your theory more. That is a powerful thing.

Ok - so for timing in more complicated music. I think Richard suggested somewhere to count timing away from the actual music. You can take a troublesome section and tap, say "da da dada da", say "1 2 3and 4" whatever works for you.

Note values are relative to each other, and you can use any kind of counting to work it out mathematically (proportionally). If your time signature is 4/4 and you have a bunch of 16th notes, conventionally it's "1-e-and-a 2-e-and-a". But there is no reason why you can't take a small section and do something else if you know relative proportions.

I learned another trick in a recent piece. I was told to first play the LH with the RH leaving out the "in between notes" until I could get the two hands physically coordinate. Then gradually I brought in the missing notes. This part is pure coordination.

When I started out as a student the first time round I was struggling with various things, trying to "get the feel" of them. I realized one day that I had only a very fuzzy understanding of some basic concepts. Sixteenth notes? Well there were whole notes, half notes, quarter notes, fast notes, and really really fast notes. So I faked it. Take any other concept, and it was the same "strategy".

I seem to remember that you will be finding another teacher. You might want to tell the new teacher that you want to learn how to approach pieces, and get the underlying theory to go with it. Often the goals of lessons veer toward the product - pieces, exams, recitals - rather than the process, because that is what most students and their parents (if young) are seen to be interested in. If you do show such interest, you might find yourself an enthusiastic teacher.

PS88 sent me a version with different durations for some of the notes, and the two embellishments removed. I conformed the version with all the chords in it to those durations, and called the result Version 2c. Here are the links:

The following link is *NOT* me playing -- it's the digital output from the MuseScore program saved as MP3:

I understand the concept of counting and can count basic pieces but when the rhythms get complicated and uneven I tend to internalize the timing do to the difficult counting while playing. It tends to make the music hackish.

Depending on how you have learned to practice and approach new pieces, I suspect that there are a number of things that can help you beyond having counts written in.

The first is a concept which is huge if you don't have it yet. That is, while performed pieces are a seamless whole, they are not approached that way. Professionals already have the skills, so they'll have less steps, but they still use this process for new, harder music. 1. You take a piece apart, work on smaller sections, and put it back together. 2. You work on different aspects of the music, and then incorporate them into a whole. Or you do one aspect or layer, then another, then another. Timing is one aspect. Timing itself can be broken down further. It can be done by you, especially once you understand your theory more. That is a powerful thing.

Ok - so for timing in more complicated music. I think Richard suggested somewhere to count timing away from the actual music. You can take a troublesome section and tap, say "da da dada da", say "1 2 3and 4" whatever works for you.

Note values are relative to each other, and you can use any kind of counting to work it out mathematically (proportionally). If your time signature is 4/4 and you have a bunch of 16th notes, conventionally it's "1-e-and-a 2-e-and-a". But there is no reason why you can't take a small section and do something else if you know relative proportions.

I learned another trick in a recent piece. I was told to first play the LH with the RH leaving out the "in between notes" until I could get the two hands physically coordinate. Then gradually I brought in the missing notes. This part is pure coordination.

When I started out as a student the first time round I was struggling with various things, trying to "get the feel" of them. I realized one day that I had only a very fuzzy understanding of some basic concepts. Sixteenth notes? Well there were whole notes, half notes, quarter notes, fast notes, and really really fast notes. So I faked it. Take any other concept, and it was the same "strategy".

I seem to remember that you will be finding another teacher. You might want to tell the new teacher that you want to learn how to approach pieces, and get the underlying theory to go with it. Often the goals of lessons veer toward the product - pieces, exams, recitals - rather than the process, because that is what most students and their parents (if young) are seen to be interested in. If you do show such interest, you might find yourself an enthusiastic teacher.

I just did a lesson/interview with a new teacher a couple of weeks ago and will start with him in March. He went over the 1 e and a 2 e and a in regard to 16th notes.

I understand the math of time signature and note values. My problem in the physical counting as I'm playing when notes go faster than 8ths and/or the piece is uneven.

I mentioned the counting as part of the template since it's probably a major issue with beginners and even intermediate players. I didn't want to side track the thread about my issues...

PianoStudent88 most the stuff I'm working on it copyrighted stuff, so I'm not sure how to bring it up.

My you tube channel you tube channel has my hackish attempts and you can see the timing issues as well as red dot recording issues too. lol. Where I have decent takes it's mostly from internalizing the sound and not so much as counting.

But please don't let my issues deflect from the thread, it was just a suggestion to aid others in the analysis department in future pieces we discuss,

.... My problem in the physical counting as I'm playing when notes go faster than 8ths and/or the piece is uneven.

My you tube channel .... has my hackish attempts and you can see the timing issues .... Where I have decent takes it's mostly from internalizing the sound and not so much as counting.

I'm not familiar with the piece you were playing, so I don't know how it was supposed to be. But other than a few little hesitations, nothing stuck out to me as being unintended.

Personally, I don't even bother trying to do any counting at all. I probably do what you call "internalizing the sound" -- I just think of it as knowing how it's supposed to go.

I use the free MuseScore program for writing musical notation, and it has a playback feature built in. You can hear how it plays "Lili Marlene" in the links I posted.

It plays what you've written with absolute mathematical precision. What I've learned from transcribing stuff exactly as written into MuseScore is that the temporal aspect of musical notation is simply inadequate. If you could count with absolute precision, just like a computer, the results wouldn't sound quite right.

I did another experiment, using the free (notice a pattern here?) Audacity sound editing program. I checked the exact timings in some good performances, and found that the duration of a beat could vary quite a bit.

So, my conclusion is that the old counting thing can be used to get you in the ballpark, but once you're close, you have to put it aside and do what feels and sounds right to you.

So, my conclusion is that the old counting thing can be used to get you in the ballpark, but once you're close, you have to put it aside and do what feels and sounds right to you.

Thanks for the reply John. I know what you mean, but I have noticed when I can actually count out an area of music, it does sound better and more accurate.

I'm working on a piece LIMBO and the middle area was sloppy at first. since it had even 8th notes, I started counting and it cleaned it right up. I know if I could count everything, it would be a marked improvement.

The nice thing about rhythm, Mark..., is that it never changes despite it being sped up or slowed down. Slow the practicing way down, with a metronome if necessary, and you'll likely find you can keep track of beat subdivisions easily with practice this way. Then, slowly increase the tempo.

1. Overview: Are there any things in this score that you don't know what they are? Ask here!

The seventh chords are new. I understand now how they are formed by adding a minor third to the primary chord, but I’m not sure if I would recognize these chords yet if I came across them in music where they weren’t labeled as such.

2. Time signature: What is the time signature? What does that mean?

I don’t understand what the “C” means for timing. I see though that there is the equivalent four quarter notes in every measure. Why isn’t the time signature listed as 4/4 time?

3. Key: What key is this in? How do you know?There are no sharps or flats in the key signature. The piece starts with a C chord in the LH and ends the same way. The final note of the piece in the melody is C. There are also F chords, and G (though they are G7) chords. So I might guess it is C major.

4. Melody: What phrases (smaller groups) does the melody divide into? Where would you put slight pauses in playing it? Where is the climax? Would you play any parts of it louder or softer?

Oh my, well without listening to one of the recordings, I don’t know what I would say about this from just looking at the music.

5. Harmony: What are the names of the chords in each measure? For this initial piece, just consider the notes in the bass clef. (Later on we'll ask about the notes in the treble clef too.) What is the first chord? What is the last chord?

The chords are written in this one, and I’m not sure yet how well I would do recognizing these new 7th chords. The C#dim is also new in measure 13.

6. Playing: Can you play or pick out parts or all of this, even if very slowly? If it seems daunting: try just the melody alone, with just one finger if you want. Try just the lowest notes in the bass clef. Try finding all the notes of each chord.

I played this through, and then tried what Greener did with the suggestion of voicing. But Greener is way ahead of me on that one because I didn’t have any ideas about what I would do differently for the voicing!

Lilli Marlene: I printed out the score and started to go through it. Something doesn't seem to be right about it. Measure 15 should end on the C chord, and the G7 shouldn't drag into it. You would have the strongest ending chord come after the beat. The same in m.10 going into 11. While looking for something to compare it with, I found this very delightful set of variations, which also makes the chords quite audible.

Lilli Marlene: I printed out the score and started to go through it. Something doesn't seem to be right about it. Measure 15 should end on the C chord, and the G7 shouldn't drag into it. You would have the strongest ending chord come after the beat. The same in m.10 going into 11.

Which version are your looking at? I think perhaps the bar 15 fix is in version 2c, the latest one. On bar 10 to 11, do you mean to delete the ties and go to a quarter rest instead? Or make the change on the first beat, even though it's dissonant?

I think I've confused things by posting a new version for every fix, so perhaps it's better that I wait until I'm back on the fast computer in the office on Monday, and address all the weekend's corrections then.

The YouTube link you posted includes some Russian versions after the variations, and one of them has a chart on screen with completely different durations.... There's even a Russian lyrics version of Horst Wessel, you find the strangest stuff on YouTube.

On bar 10 to 11, do you mean to delete the ties and go to a quarter rest instead? Or make the change on the first beat, even though it's dissonant?

A dissonance might arise depending on whether this was to be treated as a solo piano piece (I guess that’s the idea) or as an accompaniment to a vocalist.

For the latter, a very basic piano accompaniment might be a simple oom-pah kind of thing; a single LH root note for beats 1 and 3 and a RH chord for beats 2 and 4. You’d then have no problem in bar 11 where you would play just the note C (LH) on beat 1 and the RH chord on beat 2.

As a solo piano piece the C chord falling on beat 2 without anything playing on beat 1 is awkward to say the least. A better way would be to find a chord for beat 1. This could be the G7 played again. Or you could try another chord there. This could be a useful ear-experiment. Perhaps first try out some roots before trying to add the upper notes (of course, you know the melody F is one of them!).

To give it a bit of extra balance I'd probably put a chord on beat 3 as well.

Here's the part that bothers me the most. [edit: of the previous version before it was edited.]

Lille Marlene has a very strong marching beat. 1-2-3-4 It is about a young soldier caught in the he-ll of war dreaming of Lille, lighthearted dance and love. So the melody itself is jaunty and gay, while the accompaniment is a military march. It begins with a bugle call. So for the G7 starting beat 3 of m. 10 to be carried into the first beat of m. 11, this breaks up the rhythm. I think whoever wrote this wanted to harmonize the F in m. 11 and so extended the G7. But that F is a typical appoggiatura.

Similarly, the last measure should start the C on beat 1. This is extremely important because we have the final cadence** and we want the cadence to conclude on a strong beat - not half way through beat 1. What is really happening here is that the last three notes include an embellishment. You could shorten the two notes into sixteenths (or some other rhythm) and then C would start on beat 1.

** Cadence: V-I or V7-I is used to end a piece or a section of a piece. Think of fanfare: Ta-DAAA!

I don’t understand what the “C” means for timing. I see though that there is the equivalent four quarter notes in every measure. Why isn’t the time signature listed as 4/4 time?

3. Key: What key is this in? How do you know?There are no sharps or flats in the key signature. The piece starts with a C chord in the LH and ends the same way. The final note of the piece in the melody is C. There are also F chords, and G (though they are G7) chords. So I might guess it is C major.

4. Melody: What phrases (smaller groups) does the melody divide into? Where would you put slight pauses in playing it? Where is the climax? Would you play any parts of it louder or softer?

Oh my, well without listening to one of the recordings, I don’t know what I would say about this from just looking at the music.

6. Playing: Can you play or pick out parts or all of this, even if very slowly? If it seems daunting: try just the melody alone, with just one finger if you want. Try just the lowest notes in the bass clef. Try finding all the notes of each chord.

I played this through, and then tried what Greener did with the suggestion of voicing. But Greener is way ahead of me on that one because I didn’t have any ideas about what I would do differently for the voicing!

I will try to help with some of this Valencia. But, only the parts I feel confident with. I'll leave the rest for the experts. I've just learned most of this stuff myself, on the Sonata Analysis thread.

2. Time Signature: The C is for Common Time. 4/4 is the most common. So, correct this is in 4/4 common time.

3. Key: Your analysis is dead on. Yes, this is in the key of C for the reasons you have explained.

4. Melody: For help with determining what KS has asked us to look for, I would absolutely suggest listening to recordings. It isn't cheating. Try and become very familiar with it through this type of review, before even playing your first note. Personally, if I tried to do much of this from just the score, I would be in trouble. Use, whatever is available to you is my advice.

6. Voicing: How are you playing the chords now? If you are playing the chords as a block in your LH, you could try splitting up the block between L and RH for these few chords, to see the difference and see if you like it.

The new Video KS has posted shows several variations of playing the same tune and some give an entirely different mood. This is partly voicing and partly style and expression.

On bar 10 to 11, do you mean to delete the ties and go to a quarter rest instead? Or make the change on the first beat, even though it's dissonant?

The second. We discussed appoggiatura in Happy Birthday. The "Bir-" of Birthday is dissonant and then it resolves into "Day". It is often used in measure 1 of waltzes, because that dissonance resolving in beat 2 creates a strong rhythm through the way it rubs and then doesn't rub.

I wish we had a separate section for theory and analysis, along with stickies for information on concepts such as appoggiatura, key signatures etc.

Quote:

The YouTube link you posted includes some Russian versions after the variations, and one of them has a chart on screen with completely different durations.... There's even a Russian lyrics version of Horst Wessel, you find the strangest stuff on YouTube.

I didn't watch it to the end and should. It sounds interesting. I was hoping that someone who is used to taking music that is heard, and deriving the chords from it, might be able to jump in. I can hear melody, but am still quite weak in hearing and recognizing chords. It's something that I'm working on, at my end.

this was fixed, at PS88's suggestion, in post #2020432, just a few of posts ago.

I see it was edited since last night. Thanks.

Do you think the corrections might be good for learning, because it shows some aspects of rhythm, timing, and harmony and how they work together? Or is it confusing to people? I've learned the most from my mistakes, and there have been some doozies.

Lille Marlene has a very strong marching beat. 1-2-3-4 It is about a young soldier caught in the he-ll of war dreaming of Lille, lighthearted dance and love. So the melody itself is jaunty and gay, while the accompaniment is a military march.

For the military feel you'll need something like the oom-pah accompaniment I suggested above. A good example starting at 1.00 in the 'variations' youtube clip you posted.

First of all, a big "Thank you!" to PianoStudent88 and all contributing their knowledge to this discussion. It will be good to have a thread, or series of threads, that focus on elementary/intermediate theory and analysis.

Second, thanks everyone for the useful additional materials — hand-written scoring, performance videos, etc. Of course, any thread that includes a video clip of Victor Borge's brilliant piano comedy gets a thumbs up from me.

Third, a recommendation: For anyone providing a score for analysis/discussion, please provide quality pdfs or high-res images — and don't be afraid to use larger staves and notes! Some of us have aging eyes, and low-res screen-shots/jpgs just don't print large enough or cleanly enough to be easily legible.

Finally, a question: Is there any way to limit how far discussions go before we get to move on to another piece? I'm still working through most of the earlier pages but the discussion obviously has gone rather deep into chord theory, far beyond the ken of a number of people here. At what point (Is there an identifiable point?) does the thread lose its intended usefulness for beginner/intermediate players? It would be nice to figure out now how we can keep this thread/topic manageable.

- Should select person(s) be responsible for calling a halt on discussions and asking for the next score to be introduced?

- Should we simply introduce a new piece every "X" pages?

- Several people have recommended that posters just change the title/subject line to reflect the piece under discussion, but people won't always know/think to do that at the time, plus quoted posts may bring in their own title (? not sure), and that's all a headache, IMO.

- I recommend that we simply create separate threads for each piece under discussion, using a standard thread subject line. "Music Analysis 101: Happy Birthday", "Music Analysis: Lili Marlene", etc. should work. Each of these threads can be as long and involved as the posters want, and no one has to worry about changing the subject line, and people don't have to scroll through page after page to figure out where/if a different piece has been introduced yet or not, etc.

Welcome, piano_deb. I would ask people to please not change the subject line on an existing thread, because it doesn't change in all the displays, and is confusing. Adding a heading in bold to a post is recommended.

OK, new threads per piece. Do we want to start a new thread for Lili Marlene, or start a new thread with the next piece?

Would people like to see different threads for various areas of music theory? For example, major keys, minor keys, chords, intervals? Or a general music theory thread separate from the pieces threads? I'm not sure how well this idea can work because I think all the topics bleed into each other, and discussion of areas of music theory also bleeds into the analysis of any particular piece. And it's the nature of discussion on all of these threads that more advanced topics get asked about even as some people are still working through the basic topics. But I'm willing to try it if people think it would be helpful.

OK, new threads per piece. Do we want to start a new thread for Lili Marlene, or start a new thread with the next piece?

Would people like to see different threads for various areas of music theory? For example, major keys, minor keys, chords, intervals? Or a general music theory thread separate from the pieces threads?

I would start with a new thread for the next piece. And why don't we use a code giving the order, something like:Analysis 02_Title of piece after Lili MarleneAnalysis 03_Title of the next piece and so on.So it's possible start from the beginning and follow the path, or if I don't understand something I go back to the previous threads looking for topics already covered.